If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Is that the set up we are talking about? I'm fine with my training program by the way, I just have a problem with pushing the rules. Are we talking about a real situation or hypothetical? It sounds real from council oaks comment.

Wayne was not specific enough to determine weather it was a good senior test or not.
The AKC rep says its OK to run a blind between the holding blinds
Its peoples contention that it is either illegal or legal but not fair for a senior dog. I would commend the judges for doing something different yet very doable for most senior dogs . I personally get tired of looking at the same thing.
I gave a scenario that was easier than 95 percent of all the senior tests one will ever see and legal to boot. I forgot to mention it was in low cover
People still have problems with it because its out of the norm of a double then a blind
John
You missed my point entirely which means most new people did too.
As far as training programs go I'm sure yours is just fine. I used that as a figure of speech,,,meaning one should train for more than less of the minimum before they run a test. Running simple blinds between marks is part of any good basic /transitional program let alone hidden guns
If a dog cannot run the scenario I gave then they aren't ready for any senior.,,,but because they are required to run a blind first its considered a bad test. That is just silly.

Wayne, I don't get on RTF much anymore but while at the WARC test today I was told about this thread. I almost hate to resurrect it but after reading through the pages and pages speculation, I felt it important to give you my perspective as the chairman of the test in question. For the record, I was running in your senior flight so while I facilitated the decisions, I removed myself from the vote because I felt it a conflict of interest for me to weigh in my opinion.

Here's the story on the senior test setups:

We initially gave the judges a pond behind headquarters. They chose to setup on the far end and the only thing they could do was an up the middle cold blind before the marks. The right hand station would be completely hidden, but the left station would be between the road and the pond so you walk right past it on the way to the line. A pop would be fired from that station while you were in the holding blind, then you come out and run the blind. The person designated by the committee to review the setup looked at it and stated he didn't like running up the middle but saw there was little option on that end of the pond. He then requested they move the left station to a peninsula on the other side of the pond so it would be hidden, the dogs wouldn't walk past all that smell, and the pop wouldn't be quite so influencial. The judges agreed.

That night we had heavy rains. There was no where to turn around past the pond without causing substantial damage to the property. Out of respect for the landowner, we decided to make everyone park at headquarters and walk in. The walk was just shy of 300 yards (shot with a range finder) over very slippery, uneven terrain. The judges asked if they could change water. After looking at the new water, they setup what they wanted. While they were setting up, the committee met briefly and discussed the blind down the middle issue. after consulting with (5) judges,rulebook in hand, and there was no clear decision on whether it was legal or not. The hangup was "Is a mark a mark if it hasn't been thrown yet?" After discussing, our designated person reviewed the test and told them that in his opinion the new water offered more opportunity for other setups and asked that they consider a blind outside the marks. He also relayed the committee's concern of a possible rule violation and made the recommendation we error on the side of caution since no one could agree if it was a legal setup or not. After some discussion, the judges agreed and made quick changes to: the line location, location of the left station, and the blind location. The test was approved and run.

Here's the part I want everyone to understand... Just like your own clubs, we are all volunteers who try to make the best decision we can with the information we have at the time. We all knew this was one of those "damned if you do, damned if you don't" decisions. If we didn't change it, people would complain we ran a test in violation of the rules. If we changed it people would claim their dog failed because we changed the test. I stand by our decision because it was made to avoid a possible rule violation. In those decisions I would always error on the side of what we know is within the rules. On Monday following the test, one of the judges e-mailed Jerry Mann and he said the up the middle blind would have been acceptable. The e-mail was forwarded to me and forwarded by me to the rest of the committee. Now that we have a definate answer from the rep, we have different information upon which to base future decisions.

As I said, I ran the test. I assume my dog would have run the up the middle blind easier than the blind that was ultimately setup but we'll never know as she didn't get to try either. She headswung after the right bird went off never seeing it fall. I attempted to handle her to it but she sucked back to the old fall and no matter how much I casted, begged, pleaded, prayed, etc I couldn't get her out of the area before she established a hunt. No question, she failed fair and square.

I have since given a single bullet to one of my training partners with specific instuctions... "If I ever volunteer, or let myself be volunteered, to be chairman again, take this bullet and shoot me!". This was one of the most displeasurable things I have done in life to date...

I re-read that comment twice before posting but I guess I shoould have read it 3 times before hitting send... My wording may come across strong, but I assure all of you it was not my intent. The intent of the post was to clarify that the committee didn't force the judges to change anything, we merely suggested it and presented our resoning. The judges agreed to the change. I also wanted to make clear the circumstances leading up to, and the amount of thought put into the decision. It ws a tough call no matter how you look at it.

.....I have since given a single bullet to one of my training partners with specific instuctions... "If I ever volunteer, or let myself be volunteered, to be chairman again, take this bullet and shoot me!". This was one of the most displeasurable things I have done in life to date...

so sorry,
such a bummer to read.
judges get thanked and gifted.
dog handlers get ribbons and clapping hands.
landowners are thanked and sometimes even paid.

event chair never gets anything and has to fill in the ruts and pick up the trash on the way out and give the key back.
many of us reading and typing have done the job a few times.
many more have not!

an event can take on a life of its own as a clutter pile on the kitchen table
Thank You for doing the thankless job. We all have felt your single bullet thought.
I hope it is not your last chair job. Too few of us are there stepping up.

"So what is big is not always the Trout nor the Deer but the chance, the being there. And what is full is not necessarily the creel nor the freezer, but the memory." ~ Aldo Leopold

"The Greatest Obstacle to Discovery is not Ignorance -- It is the Illusion of Knowledge" ~ Daniel Boorstin

Actually, Ken, our club has thanked the Chairman & Hunt Test Secretary with a gift, similar to our judges gifts or something of equal value in the past. The gifts have been presented either at the test or at the meeting after the test. The immediate meeting this time happened two days after our test and the Chairman was out of town. I have nothing to do with it this time, but figured the presentation would happen at our November meeting if the Chairman and HT Secretary are present.

We have done this for many years and we do appreciate our volunteers who take on these big jobs emensely!

When it stops being fun, I will find something else to do with my time and money.

Gooser, unless you are really "out", , go back and read post 69. What is described there is what I have seen, and I believe it would have been FAR easier to run a blind between two stations that had not fired. And the real issue is what he pointed out. The test was set up to create suction. What matters is what the dog does when you stop him and cast him away from the factors. Personally, I am in the camp that believes the rule book refers to when, not where, the blind is run.

Carol, I'm not sure what you are saying, but check the post I quoted below. There is only 1 "where" question and there are 2 "when" questions.

1. Where - blind can not be physically located between the marks
2. When #1 - Judges CAN require marks to be thrown, 1 mark picked up and then a blind run before picking up the second mark. In this respect, the rule everyone is debating is NOT about WHEN.
3. When #2 - Judges CAN require the blind to be run between (physical location - "where") the marks before the marks are thrown because they are not considered marks until they are thrown. Judges CANNOT require the blind to be run between (physical location - "where") the marks after the marks have been thrown (this is what the rule is actually addressing) because they are now not just gun stations but actual marks. This supersedes the "where" in my #1 above because they aren't marks until they are thrown.

So it is a where AND a when question but the "when" determines "where" the blind can be placed. Clear as mud? Apparently it is a lot easier to understand than it is to explain. I've run at least one Senior test where this was required. I don't remember anything about it except what dog I was running, the fact that it was on water, the fact that it caused a lot of consternation, and my dog did fine on the blind and passed the test. I don't remember specifically but I don't think it caused a massive bloodbath in the callbacks or ribbons awarded, so I guess the dogs were generally able to handle it although there may have been some casualties from it.

While I don't think it is generally a good idea if for no other reason than all of the controversy and consternation, I don't see it as a huge deal for a good senior dog. Think of all the times we run Junior in one location and Senior in another on Saturday and we switch on Sunday or we may even switch in the same day. You've got all kinds of scent from the line, marks and gun stations in the previous set up and the dog may have to run through some or all of those (may not be using the same running line, etc.). I don't see this as a whole lot different from that. If judges have to set it up due to the limitations of the grounds or water they were given then go for it IMO. If they are setting it up just to mess with folks (and dogs) then they probably should have done something different IMO but it is legal.

Originally Posted by jacduck

I know it is against the rules but I did it anyway. I contacted the AKC and got this reply from Mr Mann.

"Mr.
John,

The official interpretation of the Regulations is that blinds in "Senior" tests may not be run between (physical location) the two marks of the double on either land or water.

While it may not be in the best interest of the judges to do so (when considering whether or not they want to be invited for future judging assignments) there is no Regulation against a judge/s requiring that a blind be picked up after one of the two marks has first been retrieved and before the second mark is retrieved!

so sorry,
such a bummer to read.
judges get thanked and gifted.
dog handlers get ribbons and clapping hands.
landowners are thanked and sometimes even paid.

event chair never gets anything and has to fill in the ruts and pick up the trash on the way out and give the key back.
many of us reading and typing have done the job a few times.
many more have not!

an event can take on a life of its own as a clutter pile on the kitchen table
Thank You for doing the thankless job. We all have felt your single bullet thought.I hope it is not your last chair job. Too few of us are there stepping up.

Ken, I'm sure it won't be my last time chairing a test. That was meant as humor for those of you reading it that have "been there, done that" and can relate to the "just shoot me now" feeling. In real life I am a project manager, managing high risk projects in crisis situations. So I'm no stranger to high stress levels, and quick action on limited information...